The Journal of Radiology and Oncology (JRO) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure impartial evaluation of all submitted manuscripts. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another to prevent bias and uphold fairness.

Steps in the Peer Review Process

Initial Screening: The editorial office checks manuscripts for scope, formatting, and plagiarism.
Editor Assignment: The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor assigns a subject-appropriate handling editor.
Reviewer Selection: Manuscripts are sent to at least two independent experts in the relevant field.
Double-Blind Review: Reviewer and author identities are concealed to ensure unbiased evaluation.
Reviewer Feedback: Reviewers provide structured reports with major and minor comments and recommendations.
Editorial Decision: Based on reviews, editors decide whether to accept, revise, or reject the manuscript.
Revision Stage: Authors respond to reviewer comments and resubmit revised versions.
Final Decision: The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision after revisions and reviewer re-evaluation (if needed).

Reviewer Selection Criteria

Subject matter expertise relevant to the manuscript.
No conflicts of interest with the authors.
Track record of scholarly publications and reviewing experience.
Commitment to confidentiality and ethical reviewing standards.

Decision Categories

Accept: The manuscript is ready for publication with minor or no revisions.
Minor Revision: Small changes are required before acceptance.
Major Revision: Substantial changes are needed; manuscript undergoes re-review.
Reject: Manuscript is unsuitable for publication due to lack of originality, poor quality, or ethical concerns.

Timelines

JRO strives to maintain an efficient peer review process:

Initial decision: within 2–3 weeks of submission.
Reviewer assignment: within 5 working days after editorial screening.
Review completion: typically 3–4 weeks from reviewer invitation acceptance.
Revisions: authors are usually given 2–4 weeks to respond.

Ethical Standards

Reviewers and editors must disclose conflicts of interest.
All manuscripts are evaluated fairly without discrimination.
Suspected ethical breaches (plagiarism, fabrication, duplicate publication) are investigated following COPE guidelines.

Note: The peer review process is the cornerstone of scientific publishing. JRO ensures transparency, fairness, and accountability at every stage.

FAQs

How many reviewers evaluate each manuscript?

At least two independent experts are assigned; in some cases, a third reviewer may be invited.

Can authors suggest reviewers?

Yes. Authors may suggest reviewers, but the editorial team reserves the right to make the final selection.

Are reviewer reports shared with authors?

Yes. Reviewer comments (excluding confidential notes to the editor) are shared with authors during revision.